undefined | Better HN

0 pointsBaseballPhysics4y ago0 comments

> Short answer: it's technically feasible but it's probably copyright infringement according to the normal legal system.

That makes zero sense.

If you're posting a new NFT that just references the existing URL, you aren't copying anything.

Unfortunately I can't watch the video right now. Care to summarize the reasoning, here? Because it escapes me.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

jgtrosh4y ago· 2 in thread

Sorry, I corrected my comment; his point is that it's actually not about copyright but about other problems such as trademark infringement, misrepresentation, etc.

Edit: also I updated the video link so it points to that specific part of the video.

vmception4y ago

> but about other problems such as trademark infringement, misrepresentation, etc.

right but specifically what?

which one and how would that play out

if there is no logo or phrase in the picture, then it couldn't be a trademark infringement. and even if there was I would have to look at it case by case, with many cases I don't think it would be applicable. the consumer has to discern with the features that the blockchain provides. if there is a valid consumer protection issue thats with the marketplaces and wallets UI. the lister doesn't have to misrepresent anything if the consumer is buying by looking at pictures alone. and the lister could likely make a compliant and accurate name. "NFT showing Bored Apes"

tshaddox4y ago

I'm not really sure what more specifics you need. It seems pretty clear that if the key identifying characteristic of a good is that a specific URL indicates the provenance of that good, then selling another good using that URL to deceive the buyer about the provenance of your good is very likely to be grounds for a lawsuit over trademark infringement or misrepresentation.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse